[OSGeo-Discuss] [Incubator] Rasdaman and OSGeo Incubation: Proposed way forward
jeroen.ticheler at geocat.net
Sun May 8 15:11:56 PDT 2016
Dear Peter, dear Bruce,
I've been silent in the previous discussions and only respond because I've been in a similar role Peter is in now. And because I feel that the situation the incubation of Rasdaman is in now is no good one for anybody. Indeed I think that there is no need at all to remain stalled.
My 1 cent advice to Peter would be to embrace the suggestion Arnulf also gave, namely "remove your personal name from the role of chair of the PSC". I was a benevolent dictator for years on the GeoNetwork project. I think it served the project well for a long time. And indeed I can safely say that when we needed a final decision on a direction to take, my vote/verdict would still weigh a little more than those of other PSC members ones we established a PSC when going through the OSGeo incubation project. Establishing a PSC, moving away from the benevolent dictatorship model proved good for the project. I've never feared the project would be "governed by a "dictatorship of voting"" as you put it. You are still there to ensure it won't! :-) Hence (and I am aware this may raise resistance to what I'm suggesting. I hope it won't because I'm not trying to judge in any way) I hope that you can drop the resistance against replacing a person's name as the person making the ultimate decisions with a role (chair of the PSC). It reads to me as if that simple change causes fear to lose control. I'm convinced it doesn't work like that in practice. It just makes governance more transparent in the long run.
I sincerely hope my suggestion can help to avoid a stalled (or even failed) incubation process. It is in fact the only reason why I did not vote on the proposal earlier on. I had hopes it was a minor thing to change in the project governance instantly.
GeoCat Bridge for ArcGIS allows instant publishing of data and metadata on GeoServer, MapServer, PostGIS and GeoNetwork. Visit http://geocat.net for details.
6721 WD Bennekom
Tel: +31 (0)6 81286572
> Op 8 mei 2016 om 23:27 heeft Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
> Dear Rasdaman Community members,
> As per below, I proposed a 3 month period of time for the Rasdaman Community to reflect on the OSGeo Incubation discussion over the last two weeks and to decide how the Rasdaman Community wishes to proceed (or not) with OSGeo Incubation.
> Peter Bauman has responded on your behalf that this time for reflection is not wanted. He would like OSGeo to make the decision now.
> I will allow a three day period for comments from the Rasdaman Community before taking further action.
> I would like to hear the view of Rasdaman Community members on this, so please respond. An email response to the Rasdaman Users list is all that is required.
> Bruce Bannerman
> OSGeo Mentor for the Rasdaman Project
>> On 8 May 2016, at 21:02, Peter Baumann <p.baumann at jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>> Allow me to respectfully disagree.
>> rasdaman is leading technology due to rigorous science and excellent engineering. This is what rasdaman users enjoy and what rasdaman developers are proud of. Independent research shows that rasdaman is much faster than Apache SPARK and other related technology. Today, rasdaman databases exceed 100 TB in size in operational setups by leading data centers, and we are going Petabyte now.
>> Still, OSGeo wants us to replace this "design by innovation" by a "design by committee" approach governed by a "dictatorship of voting". (Note that the term "dictatorship" is not brought up by me, but the provocative term has been used on us first by OSGeo in an intense discussion preceding this mail).
>> Disclaimer: TL;DR:
>> Don't get me wrong, the team and myself will always listen to input, and will discuss it openly. Decision will be solely based on technical merits, and nothing else. In particular: no majority vote. Yes, this obviously requires decent hardcore Computer Science skills, and these do not come by vote. Feel invited to join the party under these conditions, and you will find that we value genius over committees.
>> To add more background, rasdaman is now entering its seventh year of incubation (for comparison: OSGeo has celebrated its 10th anniversary). This gives a hint that OSGeo's own governance might be worth reinvestigating. BTW, OSGeo has not passed its own incubation rules and thinks this is not necessary.
>> The rasdaman team has been working hard to accommodate OSGeo requests, some of which indeed are useful for software quality, undeniably. However, we cannot afford any longer to get distracted from innovating rasdaman further, so there are no resources for waiting a couple of months and then going the next iteration, like the last 6 years.
>> A brief summary of this history can be found here (annually updated in some spare late-night moments): http://rasdaman.org/wiki/OSGeo .
>> Your annual OSGeo sprints are much acknowledged, Bruce, but we all seem to agree that this story needs to converge, in one or the other way: either to fundamentalistically focus on one specific niche setup, or to broaden its perspective and accept that the world has many colors... is Linux committee-driven? Drupal? Django? Ruby? Even NASA has tried to explain OSGeo that their approach does not always fly.
>> OSGeo has had ample time to come to conclusions, it knows what rasdaman is and how it works. Let us see whether (and when) OSGeo is able to decide. Therefore, we will patiently await OSGeo's verdict, accepting whatever its decision may be.
>> Hope that clarifies,
>>> On 05/06/2016 02:43 AM, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
>>> Dear Radaman Community and the OSGeo Incubation Committee,
>>> I propose that we suspend a decision on the way forward with Rasdaman Incubation for a period of three months.
>>> This will provide time:
>>> for all to reflect on incubation discussions events over the last two weeks; and
>>> for the Rasdaman Community to discuss and decide on the way forward that they wish to take.
>>> Should the Rasdaman Community wish to continue with OSGeo Incubation, then I will be happy to continue as OSGeo Mentor for a short period of time to work through the Project Governance approach with you. I will also be prepared to stand aside, should you prefer an alternate mentor.
>>> Should the Rasdaman Community decide that it does not wish to continue with OSGeo Incubation, I am sure that you will be encouraged to continue your association with OSGeo as an "OSGeo Community Project" . You will be able to do this using your current Governance Process.
>>> We have come a long way over the last six years. I'm impressed by how well the Rasdaman Community has developed and by the processes and the functionality of the software developed. Rasdaman has great potential in the future.
>>> It is a credit to you all.
>>> Bruce Bannerman
>>> OSGeo Mentor to Rasdaman
>>>  https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects
>>> Incubator mailing list
>>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> Dr. Peter Baumann
>> - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>> mail: p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
>> tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>> - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>> www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann at rasdaman.com
>> tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
>> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
> Incubator mailing list
> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Discuss